We strongly believe it is vital to introduce our own vehicles to the market because electric cars are still a relatively new technology. This model is not just a matter of selling more cars and providing optimum consumer choice for Americans, but it is also about educating consumers about the benefits of going electric, which is central to our mission to accelerate the shift to sustainable transportation, a new paradigm in automotive technology.
Why Tesla can't sell cars in New Jersey
— By Tyler Falk on March 12, 2014, 9:34 AM PST
Well, it seems like they've already figured out work arounds in Arizona & Texas. The law is ridiculous that you can't sell directly to consumers. Personally? I think we should have to have dealerships for ALL product-types. If I want to buy from a local farmer? Ha! I'm screwed! Only through grocery stores. If I want to buy a computer? bah, s.o.l. Only through retailers. If I want to sell something on Craigslist? Nope. Can't happen... only through ebay. The thing that makes this an interesting one is it's sorta like Big Business vs Big Business. Walmart is great, but where would they be w/out the manufacturers that supply them their products (GE, Samsung, Tyson, Black & Decker, etc) ... many themselves 'Big Business'. Clearly someone's making money off of this.. and the structure of the law and a 'who benefits' is clearly in order to narrow it down. Personally? In truth? This is retarded. Possibly a sort of 'state tax' could be issued but... the 'gallery' idea seems to work. Go to the single registered 'dealership' and 'test drive the car' then decide that you like what they claim they can order for you but, in the end, you'd rather buy online directly from California... for 8.0% cheaper (assuming a 0.6% franchise-fee increase from manufacturer to that state). Or, going with how the law reads... tesla could just register all the cars with the 'manager' of the store, and then have them in turn (the manager) sell the cars direct to consumer 'made to order' so that it isn't a 'new car'... loop holes abound. That's why lawyers make the big bucks
My Tesla is due to be delivered 3/27. I ordered it online at teslamotors.com right after my second test drive. Easy as pie. Couldn't any NJ resident do the same? (I live in NY.)
Shouldn't be a problem. People will gladly travel to another state to get a Tesla. The dealer requirement is one of the most disingenuous requirements imaginable. Most dealers today, including those in New Jersey, offer their cars over the internet and will ship them to you without any dealer contact whatsoever. It's like ordering one from a Sears Catalog. New Jersey is only hurting itself.
Tell you what Tyler, put your money where your blog is and why don't you go to KickStarter, and crowd-source some money to start up SmartPlanet Auto's, of New Jersey..... The US's first Independent Tesla Franchise.
This is suppression acted out against free trade, to protect the Jersey auto dealerships, period. Another Cristi problem, perhaps.
Ironic that this mentality crosses polictical lines. NJ being democrat with Texas and Arizona republican. The Auto Dealers Assoc donates a LOT of money to local politics and what a surprise. They get their way
I wonder if they could get around that by selling them as "very, very, very slightly used" by setting up a 3rd party to buy them across the state line and then selling them in NJ.
Another prime example of "capture theory", where over time, regulatory agencies that were originally conceived to serve the interests of consumers now instead serve the interests of preferred constituencies in industry. The consumer argument for mandating that all cars are sold through dealerships is ridiculously thin.
@xrayangiodoc FYI. NY is looking to make what you did illegal.
@skf NJ officials sound willing to update the law allowing it. The issue here is NJ technically allowed Tesla to operate illegally for over a year and instructed them to work with the legislature to address the legality.
For whatever reason that never happened. So unlike other people, the Christy administration is now enforcing the letter of the law.
@jimw1016 NJ officials sound willing to update the law allowing it. The issue here is NJ technically allowed Tesla to operate illegally for over a year and instructed them to work with the legislature to address the legality.
For whatever reason that never happened. But in good faith they gave them time to do it.
Failing to see action on the legailty of the matter, the Christy administration is now enforcing the letter of the law.
@ka5s That will not last long. In NY they are activly looking to ban Tesla. Unlike NJ where they tried to give Tesla the chance to modify an existing law blocking their sales model.
@harrim47 Not ironic at all Harrim, since the democratic legislature had nothing to do with the new rule. It was implemented by the Republican governor's office through the Division of Motor Vehicles. Christie simply stepped in and superseded the legislature's authority.
It does seem a bit ironic that free market republicans are passing laws and regulations to restrict the "free" market. I guess Tesla didn't pony up the bribes like the Dealers' Association.
@jason_lacoss-arnold "Proof of ownership" would get in the way of that idea, and so would CarFax. Furthermore, when (not if, but when) they got caught with that scheme, they could end up in prison.
Also, a car sold as "used", no matter how "slightly used", would have dropped a lot in value, and could not be sold for the same price as a new one, or even close to a new one. Tesla would not want to give up 5%-20% or more with a scheme to skip around the law.
@JohnMcGrew Oh, you mean those naughty Republican run regulatory agencies, i.e. Arizona, Texas, and now New Jersey.
@JohnMcGrew It's not a "consumer argument"; it's a government argument.
Perhaps you meant "government acting on behalf of the consumer". Which would still be a weak argument to make, since, the consumer would prefer to pay less by skipping the middle man.
The rule is based on an existing law which Tesla was informed of over a year ago.
Tesla was told they should work with the legislature to address the matter.
Tesla was told the DMV would delay acting on the existing law for 1 year.
This is an entirely different situation than other states that moved to ban Tesla.
@quintasTiberius I don't understand the relevance of your post to this discussion, unless it's from the perspective that you are a "team player" who is only outraged when some form of government over-reach occurs when your opposing party is in power.
You see, that's the big difference between you and I. I'm not a "team player" who conveniently overlooks damaging policy depending on who's in power at any particular place and time. I'm critical of government malpractice consistently. I have no more use for big-government Republicans than I do for big-government Democrats.
Clearly, that's not the same for you, and it's a shame because the country is suffering for that.
@quintasTiberius Again, you appear to be a myopic team player. If you'd look closely, you'd see that the Democrats are the overwhelming beneficiary of money from "big business". The big banks alone practically financed Obama's first term.
I'm all for sweeping away malignancy. And I'd start with the Senate. I'd doubt you'd agree.
@JohnMcGrew The relevance is that, for all the ranting you do against "big" government, most of the policies you despise are Republican attempts to protect "big" business.
If the country is suffering, then it's time to sweep away the malignancy that refuses to allow it to get better - the Just-Say-No Republican party. And last I checked, the Tea Party is still a part of the Republican party.
And as for being a "team player", guilty as charged. I am a proud member of the rational, move-forward-not-backward team.